Perkins Career and Technical Education Program

1. Plan Development and Consultation

1. Describe how the State plan was developed in consultation with the stakeholders and in accordance with the procedures in section 122(c)(2) of Perkins V. See Text Box 1 for the statutory requirements for State plan consultation under section 122(c)(1) of Perkins V.

As Industry 4.0 continues to transform Indiana’s economy and workforce needs, Governor Holcomb’s administration, as well as employers, schools, institutions of higher education, and other community stakeholders, have examined the role and purpose Career and Technical Education (CTE) has in our educational and talent development system. Long-term success in the rapidly changing economy requires continually increasing levels of proficiency of technical knowledge and skills. CTE can serve offer hands-on application and real-world relevancy for students of all levels. To ensure CTE courses and programs are integral to Indiana’s larger secondary and postsecondary education and workforce systems, we must re-envision how CTE courses connect to core academic courses, relevant technical and technological skills, and practical application and problem-solving. The case for a more narrow approach to CTE, separate from either core academics or higher level technical skills, is often based on the notion that not every student goes to college. This argument creates a need an educational alternative for the students who, by desire or by necessity, go directly into the workforce after high school graduation. As Indiana re-envisions CTE across the state, we will redefine the perception that CTE is an alternative to academic courses targeted only for the non-college bound, but for all students, in both K-12 and adults, interested in accessing middle-wage and middle-skill careers aligned to greater economic mobility. 

Long-term success in our ever-evolving economy increasingly depends on higher levels of academic proficiency, regardless of whether one intends to pursue education after high school. The ability to effectively problem-solve, think critically, communicate, collaborate, design, and innovate are all essential skills in our globalized economy. Redesigning our approach to CTE will increase the quality, consistency, and intentionality behind these programs. This new vision for teaching and learning CTE will help all Hoosiers – both youth and adults – understand both the breadth and depth of career pathways and opportunities in Indiana.

Development of Indiana’s Perkins V State Plan and the redesign of CTE began in May 2018 with the formation of the Governor’s Workforce Cabinet (GWC) and the CTE Action Team. When active, the CTE Action Team consisted of representatives from the Department of Workforce Development (DWD), Commission for Higher Education (CHE), Department of Education (DOE), Office of Career and Technical Education, postsecondary representatives, and various industry stakeholders. These members included:

• Chairman -Paul Perkins, President of Amatrol, Inc.
• Alan Taylor, Director of Career and Technical Education for Prosser Career Center
• Mark Kara, Assistant to the Coordinator for Local 150 Operating Engineers
• Jason Ells, Senior Vice President of Custom Concrete
• Maurice Coates, President of CK United
• Bob Stutz, CEO Salesforce Marketing Cloud
• Nick Goodwin, Chief Strategy Officer Department of Workforce Development
• Beth Meguschar, Associate Chief Operating Officer Department of Workforce Development
• Amanda McCammon, Chief of Workforce & STEM Alliances Department of Education
• Stefany Deckard, State CTE Director Department of Education
• Josh Garrison, Associate Commissioner Indiana Commission for Higher Education
• Stephanie Sample, Associate Commissioner for Strategy and External Affairs Commission for Higher Education
• Ron Hoke, Curriculum and Equipment Specialist Vincennes University Katie Mote, Vice President of Operations Southern Indiana Ivy Tech Community College
• Dr. Byron Ernest, State Board of Education
• Brian Pawlowski, Executive Vice President Garatoni Family Office

The CTE Action Team completed a comprehensive review of the entire CTE system, which included an evaluation of how the current CTE system functions in relation to the reauthorization of the federal Carl D. Perkins Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21^st Century Act and alignment to the changing needs of the economy. In addition to the state’s review, KSM Consulting delivered a report on Indiana’s CTE system in December 2018, confirming many of the same issues that the CTE Action Team had discovered and also providing some new insights into the complexity of Indiana’s CTE system. A summary of the findings from the CTE Action Team’s Review and the KSM Consulting report include:

• Indiana’s CTE system is widely misaligned in critical areas. Prior to July 1, 2019, authority for Perkins V rested with the State Board of Education, though the responsibility for administration and oversight of the CTE system was disparately housed across multiple agencies, including the Department of Education (DOE), Department of Workforce Development (DWD), and the Commission for Higher Education (CHE). This division of responsibility led to an often fractured system with poor alignment between secondary and postsecondary CTE, as well as full integration with the talent development system.
• Secondary CTE is operating under a plan developed in 2009. It is not consistently aligned with postsecondary CTE delivered at Ivy Tech, Vincennes, on-the-job training, or third party providers. Many programmatic standards are also outdated and archaic. Under our current system, we cannot ensure that students designated as CTE concentrators have the relevant knowledge and skills to move directly into employment or additional postsecondary educational opportunities. To ensure students receive high-quality CTE instruction and experiences, CTE in Indiana must be a rigorous and valuable pathway that includes opportunities to earn postsecondary credits and industry-recognized credentials prior to graduation. 
• A lack of consistent, readily-available data and information limits the public’s and policymakers’ understanding of CTE, thus making it difficult to monitor the quality of student outcomes and performance.  The challenges associated with accountability has led to discrepancies and inequities in outcomes and output, often overlapping with many of the demographic challenges recognized within the target populations.
• Clarifying strategic objectives for the CTE system would inform decisions on structure, funding, and curriculum flexibility. Improving data collection and availability, realigning systems, and revising funding formulas without first clarifying the purpose behind such actions would likely lessen the chance that skills-related outcomes improve. If Indiana is to increase its economic competitiveness and global relevance in the years ahead, we must make strategic, intentional investments in ensuring Hoosiers have the skills and abilities needed to succeed both now and in the future. CTE can play an important role in imparting such skills and abilities, and its role in doing so can be improved with strategic investments.
• The current CTE system creates a variety of barriers that make it difficult for innovative programs to be developed outside the traditional delivery methods. Community and industry representatives need to have a greater voice in the creation of CTE pathways. Indiana must to look for new, innovative solutions to increase the number of opportunities for students and to overcome content areas with a deficit of teachers.   

Indiana’s Vision for the Talent Development System: Indiana’s strategic vision is to create a talent system that affords all Hoosiers equitable opportunities for lifelong learning and increased personal economic mobility and provides employers the talent to grow and diversify their workforce.[1] We will endeavor to increase intergenerational social and economic mobility by:

• Ensuring quality pathways that provide opportunities for career advancement, personal prosperity, and well-being for all Hoosiers;
• Partnering with Indiana employers and education and training providers to identify and close the skills gap while meeting emerging talent needs; and
• Strengthening Indiana’s economy by aligning programs and funding to meet current and future workforce needs.

To actualize Indiana’s Vision, we must redesign our current CTE offerings to create an educational system comprised of stackable postsecondary and industry-recognized credentials aligned toward sustainable careers. 

Action steps toward this Vision Include:

• Simplifying oversight and alignment of CTE policies and administration to ensure better outcomes for students.
• Providing more flexibility for schools with accompanying accountability of student outcomes for CTE programs.
• Ensuring that each CTE program delivers the knowledge and skills needed by improving the quality, consistency, and intentionality of CTE programs of study. 
• Promoting the value, benefits, and effectiveness of CTE to parents, students and employers. 

Indiana’s Combined Plan: Development of the Combined Plan has played an integral role in leading the development and integration of the Perkins V Plan. Rather than creating this Plan in isolation, Indiana leveraged the opportunity of administrative reorganization efforts to incorporate this federal program as part of the larger approach to talent development. As the Combined Plan was developed from a human-centered perspective, Perkins was viewed from the lens of a particular target population. Focusing on how all of our educational, workforce development, and social service programs benefit those Hoosier with barriers to employment allows Indiana to systematically braid funds and blend services provided by a variety of federal, state, and philanthropic programs and activities. 

The development of the Combined Plan began with a statewide listening tour. The tour included a stop in each of Indiana’s 12 economic regions. Attendees had the opportunity to learn more about the Plan, including which Core, Partner, and other related state and federal programs were to be included. At each meeting, attendees were asked to provide input on various aspects of the talent development system through a set of discussion questions. CTE was represented at nearly each of the listening tour stops through the attendance of district directors, school administrators, and instructors. 

Various committees were convened to provide input and feedback on the development of the Combined Plan. Through these committees, discussions focused on how federal and state programs, including CTE through Perkins, could be utilized to better support Hoosiers. This process has helped to broaden the impact and scope of the CTE system, as well as facilitate in-depth conversations regarding collaboration between Perkins and WIOA. One example centered on increasing the number of opportunities for Integrated Education and Training programs through co-location of Adult Education at secondary and postsecondary schools, CTE centers, and institutions of higher education. Other possible collaborations that emerged through this process was embedding Vocational Rehabilitation and Pre-Employment Transition Services into CTE courses, as well as furthering connections between CTE and WIOA Youth programs (e.g., Jobs for America’s Graduates).

2. Consistent with section 122(e)(1) of Perkins V, each eligible agency must develop the portion of the State plan relating to the amount and uses of any funds proposed to be reserved for adult career and technical education, postsecondary career and technical education, and secondary career and technical education after consultation with the State agencies identified in section 122(e)(1)(A)-(C) of the Act. If a State agency, other than the eligible agency, finds a portion of the final State plan objectionable, the eligible agency must provide a copy of such objections and a description of its response in the final plan submitted to the Secretary. (Section 122(e)(2) of Perkins V)

The GWC, as the eligible agency, has reviewed and approved the Perkins section of the Combined Plan regarding the distribution amounts and the use of funds in consultation with secondary postsecondary career and technical education and adult education through direct communication and through the various committees. As a part of the public comment process, the Perkins V State Plan will be shared with stakeholders and representatives that were consulted for additional input and feedback. If any organization has an objection to the distribution and use of funds detailed in the state plan, it may file an objection with the GWC. Any objections along with the GWC’s response will be included in the final plan submitted. 

3. Describe opportunities for the public to comment in person and in writing on the State plan. (Section 122(d)(14) of Perkins V)

Prior to drafting the final version of the Combined Plan, the GWC conducted a statewide listening tour to gather public input on all of the Core WIOA Programs and the Partner Programs included in the Plan. The listening tour held a meeting in each of the 12 economic regions of the state. Comments and takeaways from the listening tour were considered and included in the Combined Plan and the Perkins V Program Requirements where appropriate and applicable. 

A draft of the Combined Plan will be posted on GWC’s and DWD’s website for public review and comment. The GWC will have a dedicated email address to receive public comments. The draft will be posted for 30 days prior to final revisions and submission.

In addition to being posted on the GWC website as a part of the Combined Plan, the Perkins V Program Requirements will be shared with key stakeholder groups, including IACTED Directors, postsecondary representatives, Adult Education, and secondary teachers and administrators. These stakeholder groups will have the opportunity to provide comments either in-person or through email messages. 

[1] The Stanford Center on Poverty and Inequality defines income mobility as, “A child’s chance of moving up in the income distribution relative to her parents” (Economic Mobility, 2015).